do rootfs does not create log files

do rootfs does not create log files

[Andreas Müller]

Hi,

is it a bug or a feature that do_rootfs does not create the package
information (packed_files / packages ..) in a deploy sub-folder did I
miss a switch for this?

Thanks in advance

Andreas

Re: do rootfs does not create log files

[Khem Raj]

On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Andreas Müller
<schnitzeltony@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> is it a bug or a feature that do_rootfs does not create the package
> information (packed_files / packages ..) in a deploy sub-folder did I
> miss a switch for this?
>

which files to be sure ?

> Thanks in advance
>
> Andreas
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Re: do rootfs does not create log files

[Andreas Müller]

On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 12:24 AM, Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Andreas Müller
> <schnitzeltony@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> is it a bug or a feature that do_rootfs does not create the package
>> information (packed_files / packages ..) in a deploy sub-folder did I
>> miss a switch for this?
>>
>
> which files to be sure ?
I lost them because had several build from scratch. So I can't tell
their names :( but in

deploy/images/<machine-name> was a sub-folder for each image created
containing helpful files (which packages were installed / licenses /
file in image...

Andreas

Re: do rootfs does not create log files

[Khem Raj]

On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Andreas Müller
<schnitzeltony@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>
> deploy/images/<machine-name> was a sub-folder for each image created
> containing helpful files (which packages were installed / licenses /
> file in image...

I am thinking you are talking about testlab you might have had
inherited this class
in your setup

on oe-core there is buildhistory which provides similar functionality

Buildhistory, was Re: do rootfs does not create log files

[Koen Kooi]

Op 5 feb. 2012, om 23:16 heeft Andreas Müller het volgende geschreven:

> Hi,
> 
> is it a bug or a feature that do_rootfs does not create the package
> information (packed_files / packages ..) in a deploy sub-folder did I
> miss a switch for this?

It's this one: http://git.angstrom-distribution.org/cgi-bin/cgit.cgi/meta-angstrom/commit/?id=370a884b2372b7ddd5f0876119b5f28a2b20074f

The matching commit it missing, but you can add something like this to your local.conf:

INHERIT += "buildhistory"
BUILDHISTORY_COMMIT = "1"
BUILDHISTORY_DIR = "/data/ssd/OE/buildhistory/"

That will create a tree that looks like https://github.com/Angstrom-distribution/buildhistory/. It it's missing a feature that you were using in testlab, let us know and Paul or I will try to add it to buildhistory.

regards,

Koen

Re: [oe] Buildhistory, was Re: do rootfs does not create log files

[Andreas Müller]

On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
>
> Op 5 feb. 2012, om 23:16 heeft Andreas Müller het volgende geschreven:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> is it a bug or a feature that do_rootfs does not create the package
>> information (packed_files / packages ..) in a deploy sub-folder did I
>> miss a switch for this?
>
> It's this one: http://git.angstrom-distribution.org/cgi-bin/cgit.cgi/meta-angstrom/commit/?id=370a884b2372b7ddd5f0876119b5f28a2b20074f
>
> The matching commit it missing, but you can add something like this to your local.conf:
>
> INHERIT += "buildhistory"
> BUILDHISTORY_COMMIT = "1"
> BUILDHISTORY_DIR = "/data/ssd/OE/buildhistory/"
>
> That will create a tree that looks like https://github.com/Angstrom-distribution/buildhistory/. It it's missing a feature that you were using in testlab, let us know and Paul or I will try to add it to buildhistory.
>
> regards,
>
> Koen
Thanks for the info - will give buildhistory a test.

Without having experience on buildhistory I have a question: As you
might know there was a discussion about the order of packages in
bitbake.conf [1]. I have no idea of the workflow for this issue:

1. Enable buildhistory as said above
2. Build from scratch
3. change the PACKAGES order in bitbake.conf
4. ??

If I just rebuild without any PR-bumps I assume buildhistory can do
nothing for me. Correct?

Andreas

Re: [oe] Buildhistory, was Re: do rootfs does not create log files

[Andreas Müller]

On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 10:04 AM, Andreas Müller
<schnitzeltony@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
>>
>> Op 5 feb. 2012, om 23:16 heeft Andreas Müller het volgende geschreven:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> is it a bug or a feature that do_rootfs does not create the package
>>> information (packed_files / packages ..) in a deploy sub-folder did I
>>> miss a switch for this?
>>
>> It's this one: http://git.angstrom-distribution.org/cgi-bin/cgit.cgi/meta-angstrom/commit/?id=370a884b2372b7ddd5f0876119b5f28a2b20074f
>>
>> The matching commit it missing, but you can add something like this to your local.conf:
>>
>> INHERIT += "buildhistory"
>> BUILDHISTORY_COMMIT = "1"
>> BUILDHISTORY_DIR = "/data/ssd/OE/buildhistory/"
>>
>> That will create a tree that looks like https://github.com/Angstrom-distribution/buildhistory/. It it's missing a feature that you were using in testlab, let us know and Paul or I will try to add it to buildhistory.
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Koen
> Thanks for the info - will give buildhistory a test.
>
> Without having experience on buildhistory I have a question: As you
> might know there was a discussion about the order of packages in
> bitbake.conf [1]. I have no idea of the workflow for this issue:
>
> 1. Enable buildhistory as said above
> 2. Build from scratch
> 3. change the PACKAGES order in bitbake.conf
> 4. ??
>
> If I just rebuild without any PR-bumps I assume buildhistory can do
> nothing for me. Correct?
>
> Andreas
>
[1] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2012-January/016916.html

Re: [oe] Buildhistory, was Re: do rootfs does not create log files

[Koen Kooi]

Op 6 feb. 2012, om 10:04 heeft Andreas Müller het volgende geschreven:

> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
>> 
>> Op 5 feb. 2012, om 23:16 heeft Andreas Müller het volgende geschreven:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> is it a bug or a feature that do_rootfs does not create the package
>>> information (packed_files / packages ..) in a deploy sub-folder did I
>>> miss a switch for this?
>> 
>> It's this one: http://git.angstrom-distribution.org/cgi-bin/cgit.cgi/meta-angstrom/commit/?id=370a884b2372b7ddd5f0876119b5f28a2b20074f
>> 
>> The matching commit it missing, but you can add something like this to your local.conf:
>> 
>> INHERIT += "buildhistory"
>> BUILDHISTORY_COMMIT = "1"
>> BUILDHISTORY_DIR = "/data/ssd/OE/buildhistory/"
>> 
>> That will create a tree that looks like https://github.com/Angstrom-distribution/buildhistory/. It it's missing a feature that you were using in testlab, let us know and Paul or I will try to add it to buildhistory.
>> 
>> regards,
>> 
>> Koen
> Thanks for the info - will give buildhistory a test.
> 
> Without having experience on buildhistory I have a question: As you
> might know there was a discussion about the order of packages in
> bitbake.conf [1]. I have no idea of the workflow for this issue:
> 
> 1. Enable buildhistory as said above
> 2. Build from scratch
> 3. change the PACKAGES order in bitbake.conf
> 4. ??
> 
> If I just rebuild without any PR-bumps I assume buildhistory can do
> nothing for me. Correct?

No, buildhistory executes at every do_package step, so it will record changes even without PR bumps. Note that OE doesn't sort the RDEPENDS fields and friends, so you might see a diff where there is only a re-ordering.

regards,

Koen

regards,

Koen

Re: [oe] Buildhistory, was Re: do rootfs does not create log files

[Richard Purdie]

On Mon, 2012-02-06 at 10:04 +0100, Andreas Müller wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
> >
> > Op 5 feb. 2012, om 23:16 heeft Andreas Müller het volgende geschreven:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> is it a bug or a feature that do_rootfs does not create the package
> >> information (packed_files / packages ..) in a deploy sub-folder did I
> >> miss a switch for this?
> >
> > It's this one: http://git.angstrom-distribution.org/cgi-bin/cgit.cgi/meta-angstrom/commit/?id=370a884b2372b7ddd5f0876119b5f28a2b20074f
> >
> > The matching commit it missing, but you can add something like this to your local.conf:
> >
> > INHERIT += "buildhistory"
> > BUILDHISTORY_COMMIT = "1"
> > BUILDHISTORY_DIR = "/data/ssd/OE/buildhistory/"
> >
> > That will create a tree that looks like https://github.com/Angstrom-distribution/buildhistory/. It it's missing a feature that you were using in testlab, let us know and Paul or I will try to add it to buildhistory.
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Koen
> Thanks for the info - will give buildhistory a test.
> 
> Without having experience on buildhistory I have a question: As you
> might know there was a discussion about the order of packages in
> bitbake.conf [1]. I have no idea of the workflow for this issue:
> 
> 1. Enable buildhistory as said above
> 2. Build from scratch
> 3. change the PACKAGES order in bitbake.conf
> 4. ??
> 
> If I just rebuild without any PR-bumps I assume buildhistory can do
> nothing for me. Correct?

Do two build from scratch, one with the changed PACKAGES and one
without. Keep the same build history data in both builds. You'll then
see the differences between them recorded.

(Or diff the buildhistory from the two builds).

Cheers,

Richard

Re: [oe] Buildhistory, was Re: do rootfs does not create log files

[Andreas Müller]

On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Paul Eggleton
<paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Thursday 01 March 2012 13:38:04 Andreas Müller wrote:
>> Would it be big effort to have the package scripts (pre-/postinst,
>> postrm) handled by buildhistory?
>
> Do you mean you would like the contents of the scripts recorded in
> buildhistory?
Yes that's what I meant :)
> If so, I guess this is possible; if we just output each script
> to a separate file I don't think it should be too difficult. Making it work
> nicely if you switch back to the old (symlinked) mode would be an extra trick,
> though I'm starting to wonder if that's worth continuing to support.
>
> Cheers,
> Paul
>
> --
>
> Paul Eggleton
> Intel Open Source Technology Centre